Under Analysis: We need a presidential candidate who knows the law

Mark Levison, The Levison Group


As I was walking out of the lunchroom, Sheila suggested I should run for president. Her comment took me by surprise because we had not been talking about politics. In fact, we hadn’t been talking at all. When asked why she had offered her unsolicited endorsement she quipped, “Well, everybody else is running.” Although a minor exaggeration, there are dozens of people running for president, and that’s only in the two major parties. In fact, an Internet search revealed that only candidates with political or big business background get any attention at all and that there are actually many more people running for the Democratic and Republican nominations for president other than the two dozen or so getting most of the ink.

When I was growing up, my mother constantly reminded me I could be president. As a result, the job does not intimidate me at all because the fact is I always intended to be president. Of late, it just slipped my mind, as this law thing takes a lot of time. Of course, the current list of candidates who are, or may, run for president include many individuals who got their starts in the law. There is Ted Cruz, Chris Christie, Lindsay Graham, George Pataki, Mike Pense, Marco Rubio, Rick Santorum, Jim Webb, Joe Biden, Elizabeth Warren, Martin O’Malley and Hillary Clinton just to name the “prominent” candidates. I’ve probably won more cases than most of them. In the political arena, I have been a campaign coordinator, speech writer and/or advisor for many politicians, including presidential aspirants. I have been elected president of various lawyers’ organizations, and served on my State Bar’s board of governors longer than – and receiving more votes than – any other lawyer in our state’s history. As a result, I am sure I am more qualified than most other presidential candidates. Take Don Trump for instance. I call him “The Don” out of respect. I don’t call him “The Donald,” a name given to him by his first wife Ivana. “The Don” is a more powerful description. It fits better with his temperament, and the nickname “The Donald” reminds me of Donald Duck, to whom unfortunately, Trump has a disturbing resemblance (both having comb-overs, narrow, beady eyes and big mouths).

If I decide to formally declare, the voters will see a lot of similarities between me and The Don. We both talk a lot. We both dress well – I, a little better than he. His ties are boring. We both have been accused of being arrogant. But, you know, like The Don, I’ve got a lot to crow about. We each have five children. He owned a bunch of casinos and I have had a bunch of casino company clients. Given the state of his casinos, my position is better.

Although our personalities may be the same, my resume is better. Yes, it’s true his recent financial disclosure indicates he is worth $10 billion and I am worth somewhat less. However, a significant part of his net worth is the $3.3 billion price tag he himself puts on his “good” name. Well, much of an attorney’s worth amounts to his good name, and after decades of hard work and winning cases, I think my name is worth at least $4 billion. Furthermore, I made my “fortune” myself. The Don’s dad, real estate tycoon Fred Trump, gave him a headstart on me (and most everyone else in this country) to the tune of perhaps a couple hundred million dollars. Even with that headstart, a lot of his companies went bankrupt. He has done okay since the bankruptcies, but a lot of his success is due to smoke, mirrors and friends in the media, constantly “trump”ing him, even though he is currently acting as if the media is his enemy – and we don’t really believe that, do we?

The Don says he is running because things need to be shaken up. Well, I will shake things up too. As an example, one of my platform planks will be that any time a witness does not show up for their deposition they will be put in jail. For a long time I have been writing about the unreasonable cost of litigation. It’s time to do something about it. Lawyers spend too much of their client’s money arguing over unnecessary discovery issues caused by a lack of cooperation among lawyers and/or clients. Jail will help solve this problem.

Another plank will be dedicated to lawyer dress. No lawyer will be allowed to wear polo shirts in depositions. That irritates me. I can put up with the car salesman-like plaid jackets and the pasta-stained ties plaintiff’s lawyers like my friend Dick Slickster wear, but that’s just a matter of bad taste. The extremely casual outfits of too many lawyers today reflect negatively on the dignity of the profession. You wouldn’t find former U.S. Attorney and presidential candidate Chris Christie conducting a deposition in an Izod shirt, even if they made one big enough for him.

And then there’s the death penalty. Unlike virtually all of the major candidates, I am against the death penalty. Exceptions can be made in the case of mass murderers, second offenses when a convicted murderer murders someone while in jail, and for clients who don’t pay their lawyers. The minimum wage has been, and likely will be, an important issue in presidential politics. In New York state, there is a proposal to raise fast food industry worker’s minimum wage from $8.75 to $15 an hour. I’m not sure in the long run that will have a good economic effect, but if we bracket it with a maximum wage for our “friends” on Wall Street, I think a compromise can be reached. And of course, there is lawyer advertising. No lawyer should be allowed to advertise using a telephone number that contains only a single numeral, like all 5s or all 7s. If a client isn’t smart enough to remember a telephone number with at least two different numerals in it, I am certain he or she is going to get taken advantage of by that advertising lawyer.

Finally, if I do run, my candidacy will probably prove successful, since I don’t have skeletons in my closet. My brother didn’t get us into an impossible situation in Iraq. I’m not a declared socialist like Bernie Sanders. I don’t have a permanently wet-head looking hairdo like Rand Paul, and none of my private e-mails contain State secrets like Hillary’s. Well, there may be an e-mail or two mentioning a few secret “client entertainment” trips to bars on the wrong side of town, but I don’t think anybody will ever find out about those anyway.

By the way, before you jump to the conclusion that my endorsement by Sheila is unimportant, you should know that she works in the law firm’s accounting department. There is nothing more important to the American people than the economy and their paychecks, and so what endorsement is better than one from Sheila? I will let you know as time goes on about my future plans, but for now I’ve decided to form an exploratory committee. Next week I’m headed down to Laredo to look for illegal immigrants crossing the border.

—————

© 2015 Under Analysis, LLC. Under Analysis is a nationally syndicated column of the Levison Group. Mark Levison is a member of the law firm of Lashly & Baer. Contact Under Analysis by e-mail at comments@levisongroup.com.